Leadership And The Environment

Our conversation in this episode starts by covering his commitment from last time. After a few minutes, it becomes apparent he picked a commitment based on feeling he had to fix the world---that is, extrinsic motivation disconnected from his heart.We revisited his intrinsic motivations and came up with a new commitment. Acting on intrinsic motivation is leadership. Your emotions create meaning or not. If you've been acting halfheartedly on stewardship, you may have fallen into a trap of feeling you have to act because the media or whoever warned you that you have to but the warnings didn't connect with you. So you feel you have to act for abstract, impersonal reasons.No wonder anyone would fall into that trap. Nearly all loud voices on the environment push them. We feel if we don't do enough to save the world, there's no point in trying.Chad changed his commitment to something more aligned with his connection to nature. See if you can pick up the shift. You'll hear he prefers acting for personal reasons. I pr

First, I'm so used to talking to people who don't act and try to convince themselves and others that individual actions don't matter, I loved talking to someone inspiring a movement to change international law, making progress, and enjoying the process. If you like meeting people improving the world, you'll love this episode.If lowering Earth's ability to sustain life is such a problem, why not just make it illegal? Problem solved, right?It sounds too easy, or simplistic, too naive. Or does it? Genocide wasn't once a crime and now is. Slavery wasn't a crime and now is. Land mines were made illegal and the group to make it happen won a Nobel prize.Making something illegal doesn't end it. People still commit genocide. Slavery exists today, as do land mines. But so do theft and murder and I don't hear anyone proposing making them legal. We want institutions of law enforcement and justice to help reduce them as much as possible.I went from thinking the concept was a crazy distraction to supporting it quickly, whi

Jon and I start by talking about his book, You're Invited: The Art and Science of Cultivating Influence. Some of the celebrities he's met and researched come up.Then we started talking about this podcast and how I could apply his work to cultivate influence among my podcast guests, building community. You get to hear him coaching me on his expertise. See acast.com/privacy for privacy and opt-out information.

"Unearned suffering is redemptive," said Martin Luther King.In today's episode I share what I learned today recording with Blake Haxton, a guest whose episode will appear soon. He lost two legs to flesh-eating disease in 2009.Tragedy? Yes. Reason to give up? On the contrary, according to him, his one unlucky event in life.I contend that his outlook on life and message that we all face setbacks, we can still live to our potential can help us learn to live sustainably than any number of windmills and solar panels.After all, which would you prefer, to live without fossil fuels and take others into account for all you do or to lose both your legs. If you prefer to live sustainably, then his life of fun and reward says you can attain as much fun and reward living sustainably.The Advantage of Adversity: Blake Haxton at TEDxOhioStateUniversity See acast.com/privacy for privacy and opt-out information.

Last time Joe committed to organizing and participating in a beach clean-up as part of his campaign. In today's episode he shares the state of the region, including the extent of homelessness, drugs, and violence, which made acting so far impossible.We revisit the commitment as well as personal thoughts on what's happening to America, at least in its major cities of New York City and Los Angeles.Then Joe recommits and shares his new expectations of success.Joe's campaign page See acast.com/privacy for privacy and opt-out information.

Jonathan and I continue practicing the Spodek Method. Since last recording, he practiced it with his wife. This time he shares how it went. I picked up on a nuance, that she picked a commitment disconnected from her intrinsic motivation and ended up not finding the task meaningful.What we covered relates to leadership and relationships in general. The major theme we covered is uncovering people's intrinsic motivations. People often suppress them, sometimes consciously often unconsciously. They make us vulnerable.We also talked about art. I find Jonathan's explanations and insights fascinating for revealing what artists do and how they represent more than what we see, to what we feel.If you want to motivate yourself and others to act more sustainably, this episode reveals a lot. I can't think of anything more valuable for humanity this lifetime. See acast.com/privacy for privacy and opt-out information.

Coming from a background in science but realizing that sharing numbers and data didn't influence, Joe had to unlearn a lifetime of mainstream science education. He recognized that the best known scientists, like Darwin and Einstein, were great writers. He followed in their footsteps to learn what works while maintaining scientific integrity, which he shares in this episode.In a world of storytellers and would-be leaders who don't know science and scientists who don't know how to influence, I found talking to Joe relieving. The job ahead is hard, but he shares with us the basics and it's not just avoiding plastic, however important.He's written books on effective communication. He's worked in government and more to see the communication devoid of science we have to face. He's worked with James Cameron, David Letterman, Harrison Ford, and more.If you're unsure about how to communicate keeping emotion in mind, staying consistent with scientific results, listen.Joe's page, with links to all his worksHis books:How

Since Eric's last time here, he formally declared he is running for office. Now he's reporting back months into his campaign.Did Trump not being in office slow him down? Or did our environmental problems motivate him even more?How about his commitment to avoid flying? Surely he gave it up to campaign, right? Or did he? Whichever way he went on that commitment, the decision must have been difficult, so we'll get to hear about his values.We talked about half about running for office, the challenge of choosing, consulting with people from President Biden to his wife, raising funds, handling his job as a tenured professor, considering travel across a large state and to Washington DC, and more.This podcast was one of Eric's first public statements of considering to run. Now he returns to share the experience, with an election looming.Eric's campaign page, including his policies and many videos See acast.com/privacy for privacy and opt-out information.

Today's episode explores a subtle but potentially meaningful and large shift, considering focusing on sustainability teamwork more than sustainability leadership.The main difference is that I think people feel taking a leadership role makes them vulnerable and means lots of work. Joining a team is fun. If enough people join it feels natural and odd not to.You're hearing me develop an idea in real time.Here are the notes I read from:Switch to team?Leadership stick neck outSports, business, military, music, drama, family, indigenous tribes, small communitiesPlaying Beethoven: no one but everyoneEveryone matters, bench player, fans, home court advantageImprov exerciseEveryone can join team. Not to messes it up for everyone. Imagine fan blocking. Some can lead, many leadership roles: coach, outstanding player, biggest fanInternet search: nothing relevantKicks in tribalismCompetition two meanings: winning versus finding and reaching their potentialOpponent is the old values and complacencyDifference between parent

Sorry for the slow pace of this episode, but just before recording I looked at the firehouse across the street from my apartment, the small plaque naming the firemen who died trying to help others, and the flowers people put there for them, which led me to lose it as I started recording.I've never considered the changes to my life meaningful in comparison, despite my losses being greater than anyone I know who didn't die or was related to someone who died for the obvious reason that no material loss compares. Not even close.But twenty years later, it occurs to me that not communicating about the loss and what I learned from it doesn't help either, because when faced with a huge material loss---I lost about ten million dollars and the future I'd sacrificed other dreams for---we can choose to give up or we can choose to find our values and live by them, if not the fleeting material stuff.In this episode I share what I live for, what in part I learned from the firefighters who served that day, the servicemembers

Michael begins by describing himself as a Protestant evangelical conservative PhD candidate at one of the largest and oldest Baptist seminaries, what that description means, and what experience and choices brought him there. These experiences were meaningful and his choices deliberate and considered.We talk about scripture, family, faith, hope, the environment, modern culture, sin, gluttony, and more. In my experience people who work on the environment disengage or oppose conservative religious views. My experience in engaging with them keeps making me want to learn more about their views. Some I expect and know, others surprise me.Michael also asks about my views and why I choose as I do around sustainability and stewardship. His question are basic ones I think people would like to know, but slightly different than I'm used to hearing. He then interprets them from a Christian perspective, which I can learn from. See acast.com/privacy for privacy and opt-out information.

Reading front-page headlines about activist investors gaining some control of Exxon's Board of Directors reminded me of past guest Dar-Lon Chang, who worked at Exxon for sixteen years. I asked if he had inside information on it.He told me he did, which he shared. He also shared his personal experience living in a community striving to live sustainably in Colorado. Living more sustainably is why he left Exxon. Now a real estate developer is undoing their work after apparently lying about his intent to honor the community's interests.You'll feel outrage, though also, I hope, motivation, that he and his neighbors aren't just accepting gas lines being fed to houses in this community. They're fighting back. See acast.com/privacy for privacy and opt-out information.

I hope you hear Jonathan and I sharing a great rapport---on art, stewardship, Christianity, and enjoying life.If you've reached this conversation, you know what we're covering in this episode: his results doing the Spodek Method, partly doing it, partly learning how to do it.He's an artist and family man. He started picking up trash, which naturally became a family activity and point of personal growth. He then did more. Why? Because he enjoys acting on his values. We all do.I also describe the Spodek Method for you, the listener, so you can do it too, and bring joy or other rewarding, intrinsic motivations to people in your life. See acast.com/privacy for privacy and opt-out information.

When I read about Cassiano setting the world record for most burpees in an hour--951---I knew I had to meet him.Though I've maxed out at a mere 370 in a day, I did most of them in under three hours. Still dramatically slower than Cassiano, but I've kept my streak unbroken for about ten years.I had to learn his motivation, his obstacles, how he overcame the obstacles, his training, how the event felt, and all of what goes into setting that record. He wasn't doing it for the money and even the motivation to raise funds for his niece's health wouldn't necessarily keep him motivated.He shares his motivation, perspective, beliefs, and how he handled injury. Anyone can challenge themselves as much to live by their values.Then you'll hear his environmental values stemming from growing up poor in Brazil, coming to America and struggling, then making it here. How he acts on his values is so simple, affordable, and rewarding, anyone can do it. I predict hearing him will make his actions sound attractive. I recommend li

Sorry the audio doesn't show the big Trump flag behind Andrew, because in this episode, I hear a regular guy who sees America's small towns and big cities becoming polluted and acts. Not that Trump supporters aren't regular people, but that I see the mainstream environmental view of Trump supporters as the enemy, people who don't get it, or won't.I think it takes two to tango in cases like this. If you paint people as enemies who can't get it, I don't see how you can expect them to listen to you. If you only speak in terms of your values, I don't think people with different values will feel understood or want to listen to you.Meanwhile, I find that all people have intrinsic motivation to act on the environment. Connect with people on their terms and they'll engage, including American conservatives on sustainability and the environment.Andrew, as you'll hear, for example, acts on his own motivation to recycle. He likes it and finds it easy enough that his action gets his girlfriend in on the project. That is,

For the 500th episode, I share the outcome I expect to make happen from all this podcast experience as part of my mission to change culture to embrace, not refrain from or fear, sustainability and stewardship.I describe how I will lead people at leverage points of systems to share their intrinsic motivation, act on it, and lead their organizations to huge changes for their intrinsic motivations.When our culture changes, we will act because we want to, not because we have to. Then we will be off to the races to change.Episode 000 See acast.com/privacy for privacy and opt-out information.

The notes I read from for this episode:I asked many questions on the last episode. The core ones were “why aren’t we switching to renewables and not polluting faster?” I know we can’t switch overnight, but what sets the pace? Do we know if the limits will go away, like we just need to build more factories, or maybe they won’t, like what led us to retract from supersonic flight? It worked in some ways, but not enough. A mix of social, business, engineering, and physics issues pulled us back.How much farther can advances go? Can we expect as great advances as the 747 compared to the Wright brothers’ first plane? How much of the solar power hitting the Earth can we effectively use?I point you to a paper called Pulling Back The Curtain On The Energy Transition Tale, which I link to in the notes. It’s not peer-reviewed, but shares all its sources. It looks at the limitations of renewable energy sources. What does it take to build solar and wind farms? How many do we have to build? How many can we? Things like that

My notes I read from:Why do we still pollute, part 1: the questionsDoes the following sound familiar?We use a lot of energy, but we’ll electrify everything and power them with wind and solar.Yes, we need to build a lot, but prices are cheaper than ever for renewable power and batteries. They fell faster than anyone expected and will keep falling. More solar energy hits the Earth daily than we need in a year.There are some problems, like that the sun doesn’t always shine, the wind doesn’t always blow, and we haven’t electrified some things, like heavy loaded trucks, airplanes, and container ships, but they’re just engineering issues that we’ll resolve.Nobody at the time of the Wright brothers could have predicted the 747. People a decade ago didn’t predict prices and capacity for renewables and batteries falling so fast.A world where we live like today just without carbon emissions is around the corner. All we have to do is wait, maybe fund some research.Those ideas sound enticing and compelling. Why was every

Gernot Wagner posted a story in New York Magazine about personally acting in a big way on his living situation.People criticized his sharing something vulnerable. Sadly, people acting in stewardship, in everyone's interest, still today have to suffer criticism. I describe in this episode his article, the criticism he faced (as did I), and the systemic effect of this criticism.Quoting from my book, I'll show how strongly blind criticism exacerbates inaction and accelerates polluting. Beyond annoying, it augments the problems.Gernot's article: How I Greened My Prewar Apartment (It Wasn’t Easy): A climate economist overhauls his leaky, 200-year-old co-op.His home pageThe video of Dennis Meadows' hula hoop demonstration See acast.com/privacy for privacy and opt-out information.

I met Ambrose through recent guest Scott Hardin-Nieri. Regular listeners likely noticed how I've been hosting more guests leading religious communities. I'm drawn by a few things. One of the main reasons is that I find many who want to speak and act more on sustainability.Another is that I find that when they act, they do so out of motivations and emotions that feel closer to mine than mainstream environmentalists. I admit my perception may be biased, but from religious actors, I feel joy, glory, duty, and passion. From environmentalists, I feel less rewarding emotions. I find Thomas Clarkson and William Wilberforce more inspiring than hugging trees.Ambrose is taking on leading the intersection of two demographic groups many wrote off or consider uninterested, actively apathetic, or even anti-interested in environmental stewardship---blacks and Christians. He doesn't find them uninterested. On the contrary, he is organizing and supporting increasing numbers of sub-communities.I believe evangelicals and conser